Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Future Wars => Topic started by: Doc Twilight on November 05, 2009, 07:52:31 AM
-
Here's a self propelled gun I knocked up using one of my Euzkadi kits and assorted bits and pieces from the bits box. It will likely be a Crusader weapon. The idea is that it's a captured Royalist tankette armed with a looted Royalist artillery piece. You know, battlefield booty put to good use;) I suppose it could just as easily be a Royalist piece.
The Hull MG of the tankette has been replaced with an artillery spotting device. This was salvaged from some random Armorcast piece I had laying about in the VSF bin.
Haven't decided on a model name or color scheme yet, but working on it, really;) I have recently ordered a couple companies from Zombiesmith, so this piece will soon have some company.
Several shots for those interested. Gun shield includes an ammo rack, a detail I think turned out nicely, even without paint. Of course, all of these disparate pieces will look much prettier and blend together once the paint is applied. And yes, those rivets are rhinestones again.
(http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc178/Mithras77/100_0883.jpg)
(http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc178/Mithras77/100_0885.jpg)
(http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc178/Mithras77/100_0884.jpg)
(http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc178/Mithras77/100_0888.jpg)
-Doc
-
there, there :)
pretty nice thing
funny to see all the time people have the same ideas (rhinestones)
the conversion is pretty straightforward (in the sense of realistic)
reminds me of several improvised solutions of that time
is the superstructure meant to be pivoting?
wanna hear comments?
-
Of course, comments are welcome.:)
Gun-shield is non rotating. Very much in the vein of early 20th century self-propelled guns. Not much articulation in the main gun, open top and rear.
-Doc
-
OK, there You are
so, I only want to share some experience in vehicle building... ;)
since the superstructure is open, there should be some mount visible, fixed on the roof
the armour is somehow not linked to the roof - since it can not overlap, it should be slightly less wide in order to not povide catching angles, and maybe just a bit diagonal to the front, maybe simply follow the outline of the tank (seen from above)
The cannon is too far to the left - there are assymetrical mounts, but this is too assymetrical since it would not allow to service the gun
the idea with the rhinestones is good, but since there is a big difference to the other rivets, they should be less and further apart - rivets of that size exist, but in that number they would rather weaken the structure - 3 or 4 should be enough (what I would think of is that the tank is riveted, but the improvised superstructure is screwed together with big screws)
what did You use for the armour?
it looks thicker than the gun barrel
and there should be also some slit in the front plate to allow for elevation
adding some platform behind the gun would add to the credibility
basically I like Your conversion, so my comments are only meant to make it more in line with the tank and look a bit more realistic
please don't get me wrong - I rebuilt several of my conversions 3-4 times (So I am either too critical or too pedantical or both ;) )
-
I'll take these point by point:)
>>so, I only want to share some experience in vehicle building... ;)
Much appreciated!
>>since the superstructure is open, there should be some mount visible, fixed on the roof
Not sure I follow completely. Could you explain?
>the armour is somehow not linked to the roof - since it can not overlap, it should be slightly less wide in order to not povide catching >angles, and maybe just a bit diagonal to the front, maybe simply follow the outline of the tank (seen from above)
The gun shield is more or less very close to flush with the armor, but I definitely see what you mean. Perhaps if I added some putty and/or armor plate linking the front of the gunshield with the front of the hull in some way? I've seen numerous self-propelled guns with wider gunshields than hulls, but I do see your point, so I'll see what I can do about fixing it.
>The cannon is too far to the left - there are assymetrical mounts, but this is too assymetrical since it would not allow to service the >gun
I politely disagree here, but only because I've seen a lot of impractical designs. There is enough room to access the gun from either side, from the gunners perspective, with the loader handing up rounds from the hull. The idea is that the driver also serves as gunner, whilst the commander serves as loader/spotter.
>the idea with the rhinestones is good, but since there is a big difference to the other rivets, they should be less and further apart - >rivets of that size exist, but in that number they would rather weaken the structure - 3 or 4 should be enough (what I would think of >is that the tank is riveted, but the improvised superstructure is screwed together with big screws)
That is an excellent point. I'll see about removing some of those excess rivets!
>what did You use for the armour?
>it looks thicker than the gun barrel
The gunshield is formerly part of an exacto blade container, covered over with greystuff, and then sanded smooth.
>>and there should be also some slit in the front plate to allow for elevation
There is a slight slit for elevation, but I'll see about widening it a bit - if for no other reason than to make it more visible, and practical. I really waffled about this, as I've seen numerous examples with little to no elevation, especially during the early period of development for these things. Some are literally just boxes with guns sticking out!
>adding some platform behind the gun would add to the credibility
How so?
>>basically I like Your conversion, so my comments are only meant to make it more in line with the tank and look a bit more realistic
please don't get me wrong - I rebuilt several of my conversions 3-4 times (So I am either too critical or too pedantical or both ;) )
Much appreciated. Your thoughts are all good. I look forward to hearing your comments.
-Doc
-
- the gun appears to be fixed to the shield - this never happens. Usually the wheeled carriage is taken off and the basic traverse device is fixed on the roof (with reinforcements if necessary) - I can't see that
the thing with the gun shield (as pretty much of my comments) is a small detail
- Yes, there are many examples of improvised SP artillery with superstructures oversizing the vehicle, but then always the gun shield overlaps downwards and joins the hull at an angle
(I don't remember the name, but the first improvised SP in Germany were made by an artillery engineer in France, who converted his battery to SP - his designs with captured french tanks were so successfull that he ended up with a field workshop serially converting SP guns for others and eventually he continued with the very succesful Marder and Wespe at FAMO)
since You can't do that because of the hatches, You should basically make it appear as if the shield is simply an extension of the hull
- a slight diversion from 90° is always a good idea, since it optically corrects the design
- the position of the gun maybe a matter of taste, or a misjudgement of mine with the picture
- the firing slit is definetely not visible for me
no problem with improvised looking guns mounts, but practicality goes first
since this seems to be some kind of field gun, the first thing in construction (nothing can be done about the basic design, so moving the engine etc would be a major conversion) is to choose the spot where to
fix the gun (basically the available space and the balance and recoil)
next come traverse and elevation, that must be functional.
Of course the role of artillery changes slightly when SP, and the basic movements are made with the vehicle, but the small aiming is still done with the mount - and this should be visible on the model
- I once made 2 SP Howitzers, but they look too fixed, so I will reconvert them some day
- by my taste, the armour looks too thick compared to the Euzkadi
- the top behind the gun is sloped, so the crew would slip while servicing the gun. Look at the Pz 38t Marder, that also has a sloped engine cover: a small platform with low siding was added.
The servicing platform could als be oversizing the hull, it bears no weight and doesn't imbalance the vehicle (besides, where do You want to put Your crew?)
- one other thing: the rivets on the top armour are useful only where it joins the side. since there is no reinforcement of the edge, to what rivets or screws could attach, the ones on the edge look like decoration
I personally enjoy improvised SP guns, I have built a lot of kits in different scales (So I know the basic german designs almost by heart ;)) and I converted some and scratchbuilt few.
This might be the reason why I am so peculiar about that - my basic process hierarchy established by studying the sources is:
functionality of the gun (this is the main purpose and a must)
fixing of the shield (not always necessary, but usually employed)
mobility (balance of the weight, recoil - this was often neglected in reality)
crew protection comes last and was often enough neglected
then comes the model design, where I try to keep an optical balance between the original model and the additions (in Your case the rivet thing and the armour thickness)
useless to say, that from around 60-70 vehicles I built for 28 mm, I was almost never succesfull from the start. Only the last say, 10 models are OK for me, a lot of the early conversions I reconverted (often enough 2-3 times, even when painted) or simply scrapped. I would guess that some 30% of my collection will be either modified or compromised with in favour of new builds.
unfortunately, I am not that talented like some others here who simply do things perfectly from scratch, I always go along with the process - but that's the fun of it and I like it.
the only flaw is that I always have some 10 projects lying around WIP that I cannot use in gaming - otherwise it's OK for me
-
All excellent points and suggestions, former user.
I am thinking about going in a radically different direction, taking a cue from the Zrinyi (not to mention the Semoventi) and making the weapon hull mounted, enclosed. With a bit of top detail for the flat surface above (not sure what, as yet - maybe simply some kind of hatch and or overplating), this would seem to be practicable, given the length of the hull. It's a relatively small piece, with a short recoil, so in theory it could work practicably if the weapon were placed between the two crewmen (as in the Semovente da 47/32 and also the 75/18 if memory serves, though the 75/18 obvioiusly had more than two crew!).
-Doc
-
All excellent points and suggestions, former user.
I am thinking about going in a radically different direction, taking a cue from the Zrinyi (not to mention the Semoventi) and making the weapon hull mounted, enclosed. With a bit of top detail for the flat surface above (not sure what, as yet - maybe simply some kind of hatch and or overplating), this would seem to be practicable, given the length of the hull. It's a relatively small piece, with a short recoil, so in theory it could work practicably if the weapon were placed between the two crewmen (as in the Semovente da 47/32 and also the 75/18 if memory serves, though the 75/18 obvioiusly had more than two crew!).
-Doc
The hetzer would be another good one to look at too
-
The hetzer would be another good one to look at too
Very true, Mate. Forgot to mention that one - nasty little thing.
-Doc
-
I don't have any problem with liberally festooning armor with rivets, even where rivets wouldn't be necessary in reality. However, I just do not like these rhinestone rivets. I know it's nice to find a rivet shortcut, but they look just way too big. (And, of course, they have an odd shape, but this is secondary to the main problem that they look too big.)
Having gotten that out of the way, I look forward to seeing your Quar. Are these your first? Delightful creatures.
-
think of them as bolts, not rivets
looking forward to see the other thing, though I like the idea as it is
crew inside is always the least I think of.
there always are the fancy drawings, but I never get to understand how they could squeeze people into the vicinity of a recoiling breech, so...
when I was 10, I got to sit once in a renault chenilette (the one with the 2 small cuppolas)
I found it a wonderful tank for a kid ;)
-
Quar: another form of pure gamer candy goodness that I must resist. :'( I'm sure you will have lots of fun with yours!
Great idea for a tankette conversion, looking forward to seeing it painted up and in a game. :)
-
I don't have any problem with liberally festooning armor with rivets, even where rivets wouldn't be necessary in reality. However, I just do not like these rhinestone rivets. I know it's nice to find a rivet shortcut, but they look just way too big. (And, of course, they have an odd shape, but this is secondary to the main problem that they look too big.)
Having gotten that out of the way, I look forward to seeing your Quar. Are these your first? Delightful creatures.
Fair enough. For this model, they are perhaps too big, but they were the smallest I could find at the time. As for shape, I (politely) disagree. They are remarkably like rivets of the late nineteenth/early twentieth century when painted. There is no such thing as a "round" ended rivet, despite its commonplace use in model building, etc, so I prefer something with a multi-faceted surface, such as a rhinestone. This is a matter of personal preference, of course, and everybody has his own favorite "rivet trick":)
They are my first Quar, yes. I have been eyeing them for quite a while now, and I finally decided to order them, as sort of a release valve from all the intensely historical stuff I've been working on over the last year. There have been a few exceptions, but most of my painting in the last several months has involved the Ancients, the WSS, WW2, etc.
-Doc
-
This is a matter of personal preference, of course, and everybody has his own favorite "rivet trick":)
As you say, "Fair enough." :)
-
here Doc, I've been elaborating on Your conversion, so here are some ideas:
SP artillery
(http://i886.photobucket.com/albums/ac61/former user_the_anarchist/Euzkadophrenia/SP.jpg)
Tank hunter
(http://i886.photobucket.com/albums/ac61/former user_the_anarchist/Euzkadophrenia/euzkadiTH.jpg)
Tank hunter with small MG turret
(http://i886.photobucket.com/albums/ac61/former user_the_anarchist/Euzkadophrenia/euzkadiTHw.jpg)
APC
(http://i886.photobucket.com/albums/ac61/former user_the_anarchist/Euzkadophrenia/euzkadiapc.jpg)
-
Some very good stuff, former user. And some clever photoshop chichanery. Thank you!
I'll have to consider those for future conversions.
After fiddling with a few plans, I took a new approach and began a rebuild on Thursday evening. Finished most of the work yesterday. Here she is, in current form, the "Rhinoceros Beetle" self-propelled gun.
In this instance, the weapon is hull mounted. A hatch has been added to the top, centered above the gun (and thus, slightly off center on the hull. I have added a new ventilation plate to the top rear of the hull as well. The spotting scope remains in place of the hull machine gun.
(http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc178/Mithras77/100_0910.jpg)
(http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc178/Mithras77/100_0912.jpg)
(http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc178/Mithras77/100_0911.jpg)
(http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc178/Mithras77/100_0918.jpg)
Comments, etc. welcome.
-Doc
-
looks very good
You could also make a second, open hatch with an artillery spotter/commander, to switch as necessary
don't know what gun it is, but it could be a pompom in a combined FG/AT role
this picture fiddling is the latest addition in my conversion design process
this way I can see how the model could look like before I start ruining it :D